Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Kidchameleon · 02-11-2020 09:45PM

DubInMeath wrote: »

It was scummy missus, and if want to try and defend it and trump for doing it, you need help.

If you want, we can continue this by pm as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I will happily elaborate why I feel Trump has done nothing wrong & Id love to hear your arguments too

02-11-2020 09:53PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you want, we can continue this by pm as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I will happily elaborate why I feel Trump has done nothing wrong & Id love to hear your arguments too

It's actually got plenty to do with the topic in hand.

02-11-2020 09:56PM

at what stage does hobbyhorsing with several hundred word posts about getting a card ten years ago for the twentieth time become abuse of the thread

Smee_Again · 02-11-2020 09:57PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

at what stage does hobbyhorsing with several hundred word posts about getting a card ten years ago for the twentieth time become abuse of the thread

I don’t know but the horse is long since flogged.

02-11-2020 10:02PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you want, we can continue this by pm as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I will happily elaborate why I feel Trump has done nothing wrong & Id love to hear your arguments too

So what I'm reading here is that's it's OK to sexually assault someone who may not complain about it because it would likely be detrimental to their career in some way?

So I just need to steer away from sexually assualting women who might be uncowed by me? Or can I still sexually assault them but I just shouldn't talk about it in an interview?

Hmm, it's not as clear cut as I thought. Maybe you ARE right.

Quantum Erasure · 02-11-2020 10:02PM

Smee_Again wrote: »

It’s just so hard to know who is the more trustworthy poster, the mods or the person who posts edited clips, links to easily proven lies and even Tommy Robinson’s website.

I wouldn't be too quick to trust mods either, tbh

Beasty · 02-11-2020 10:03PM

This thread is about the Current Affairs Forum - not other forums. It's also for general feedback on the forum, not somewhere to discuss the merits or otherwise of individual actions - there are other avenues to discuss specific mod actions

Now back on topic, as if the bickering continues we may just have to close this thread up

ExMachina1000 · 02-11-2020 10:09PM

Are jibes about posters mental health or illness allowed or is it just in real life that they are not tolerated?

Overheal · 02-11-2020 10:18PM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There were no forum bans, the posters are still there. There was no action as the behaviour continues... you yourself have gotten away with murder. Oh an just to be clear, I dont want bans & I actually dont give a sh1t what people call me. What I really have a problem with is the double standard

Who died?

02-11-2020 10:44PM

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Are jibes about posters mental health or illness allowed or is it just in real life that they are not tolerated?

Don't know about yourself personally, but there's nothing that I say on here that I haven't or wouldn't say in real life.

But then again I personally haven't met anyone who tries to defend someone sexually assaulting people and saying that they automatically consented to being assaulted.

ExMachina1000 · 02-11-2020 10:47PM

DubInMeath wrote: »

Don't know about yourself personally, but there's nothing that I say on here that I haven't or wouldn't say in real life.

But then again I personally haven't met anyone who tries to defend someone sexually assaulting people and saying that they automatically consented to being assaulted.

Is it a coincidence that it was you that replied or do you think you might have written something you knew was borderline?

Looks like you got away with it.

02-11-2020 10:49PM

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Is it a coincidence that it was you that replied or do you think you might have written something you knew was borderline?

Looks like you got away with it.

Just.answering about what I'd do in real life as per your comment.

Didn't say anything that wasn't the truth, did I?

ExMachina1000 · 02-11-2020 10:50PM

DubInMeath wrote: »

Didn't say anything that wasn't the truth, did I?

You wont mind typing it again so. You can stand by it and be proud of yourself

The reply about Trump isnt the comment I'm talking about.

02-11-2020 10:53PM

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

You wont mind typing it again so. You can stand by it and be proud of yourself

That I think anyone sexually assaulting someone is scummy, no I don't have any issues saying that, why would/should I?

osarusan · 03-11-2020 05:38PM

I don't actually know what the issue is with threads going over 10000 posts, but there seems to be one, and as the CA election thread is on just over 9000 posts, it might be worth a new thread, as there will be a deluge of posts over the coming hours.

Beasty · 03-11-2020 06:24PM

osarusan wrote: »

I don't actually know what the issue is with threads going over 10000 posts, but there seems to be one, and as the CA election thread is on just over 9000 posts, it might be worth a new thread, as there will be a deluge of posts over the coming hours.

Hamsters perish in a very unpleasant fashion

Apparently it does create system issues, and 10k was a reasonably arbitrary number (there are some old, long-since closed, threads that have a multiple of that number - just did a sort by post number in the Soccer Forum for example and there's a thread with 33k posts) but one that everyone is pretty familiar with and so we'll get reports if one does stray over that threshold

We'll keep an eye on the thread, and probably start a new one before one of us heads off to bed!

Overheal · 03-11-2020 07:13PM

When a large thread is being posted to on the site, you feel it. Makes the hamsters crawl.

blanch152 · 05-11-2020 11:30AM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There were no forum bans, the posters are still there. There was no action as the behaviour continues... you yourself have gotten away with murder. Oh an just to be clear, I dont want bans & I actually dont give a sh1t what people call me. What I really have a problem with is the double standard

To be fair to the mods, they can only deal with reported posts. I have had that discussion with them.

There are posters who in their anger or disappointment at something not going their way revert to reporting a number of posts of those they disagree with. I have been a victim of that, with some relatively mild posts reported compared to pages of drivel being let go. I can't be bothered reporting all of it, would be a waste of mods time, but like you say, because I don't do that, and my posts get reported, I end up getting warnings or thread bans, despite being far from the worst.

I am not going to lower myself to that level of tit-for-tat, but there is no easy solution.

Call Me Jimmy · 05-11-2020 11:05PM

Lad banned there for saying Biden has dementia. You know that he could have early stage dementia and not be diagnosed? I can't imagine how thin-skinned you have to be to be unable to read people's opinions about your dear leader.

05-11-2020 11:25PM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Lad banned there for saying Biden has dementia. You know that he could have early stage dementia and not be diagnosed? I can't imagine how thin-skinned you have to be to be unable to read people's opinions about your dear leader.

Which poster, the one saying Biden would walk on for the inauguration with his trousers around his ankles and similar, or the other one also quoting conspiracy theories?

Overheal · 06-11-2020 04:07AM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Lad banned there for saying Biden has dementia. You know that he could have early stage dementia and not be diagnosed? I can't imagine how thin-skinned you have to be to be unable to read people's opinions about your dear leader.

Been several warnings and announcements about this both in this very thread and in the forum. Don't know what's left to complain about.

Snake Plisken · 06-11-2020 03:49PM

Just wondering if mods are going to take control of the biden/Trump main thread? Constant attacks on anyone who isn't on the Biden train. And responding with gifs of snowflakes etc is the same as name calling! What happened all the rules you set out on name calling? If all bets are off then I'll give back as good as I get.

Call Me Jimmy · 06-11-2020 04:05PM

Overheal wrote: »

Been several warnings and announcements about this both in this very thread and in the forum. Don't know what's left to complain about.

There's no medical evidence Biden has a stutter, so a lot of posts to delete. It's literally disallowing opinions or even comments on someone's physical or mental wellbeing, that includes all the millions of posts calling trump insane, narcissistic etc. As a principle it means any claims have to be incontrovertible and opinions simply aren't allowed. Great look for a discussion site and a lot of work for the mods who don't understand and can't defend their own actions.

06-11-2020 04:10PM

i agree with the above

the bar for fair comment has been set impractically low, tbh

Baggly · 06-11-2020 04:14PM

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Just wondering if mods are going to take control of the biden/Trump main thread? Constant attacks on anyone who isn't on the Biden train. And responding with gifs of snowflakes etc is the same as name calling! What happened all the rules you set out on name calling? If all bets are off then I'll give back as good as I get.

Report posts. Reported posts are being reviewed and where appropriate, actioned. Plenty on BOTH sides have been actioned since polling day and further back.

Baggly · 06-11-2020 04:18PM

We have gone over the reasons for asking for a better standard of posting in this feedback thread before. The reasons haven't changed.

When it was a free for all the previous incarnations were muck and overflowing with trolling behaviour.

Since we have introduced guidance on what's acceptable we may have had to action a few posters and delete a few posts, but the majority of people contributing are finding a way to express their opinions without always needing incontrovertible proof or annoy the other side. There are exceptions to this but they are exceptions, not the majority.

The suggesting you need to back up every single statement is hyperbolic. I can find plenty of opinions in the last few pages of the trump v Biden thread that haven't provided proof and yet are fine.

Call me Jimmy you seem to be conflating rules around trolling phrases with not being allowed to express an opinion. I suggest you consider this again as I don't see any evidence for what you have said.

Call Me Jimmy · 06-11-2020 04:21PM

Baggly wrote: »

Call me Jimmy you seem to be conflating rules around trolling phrases with not being allowed to express an opinion. I suggest you consider this again as I don't see any evidence for what you have said.

I'm not confusing anything. There was a rule around using terms like 'sleepy joe' that I said already I have no problem with.

There is also a rule that you failed to defend around requiring medical evidence for commenting on the mental status of the candidates. Is that lifted?

And I was not being 'hyperbolic' I stated clearly that I said the principle you are applying for commenting on someone's mental status is what I extrapolated.

Baggly · 06-11-2020 04:35PM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

And I was not being 'hyperbolic' I stated clearly that I said the principle you are applying for commenting on someone's mental status is what I extrapolated.

Ok so you were being hyperbolic.

As a principle it means any claims have to be incontrovertible and opinions simply aren't allowed.

That is not true. At all.

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I'm not confusing anything. There was a rule around using terms like 'sleepy joe' that I said already I have no problem with.

There is also a rule that you failed to defend around requiring medical evidence for commenting on the mental status of the candidates. Is that lifted?

We have a rule not to call the candidates names. What is the issue there? You cant express your opinion without name calling?

We have an issue with propagating the conspiracy theory that Joe Biden is in mental decline, to disrupt other discussions in the thread, because it has no medical basis in fact that anyone can point to.

That it keeps getting brought up again and again is, like the name calling, a tactic to troll one side of the debate. Again, if you are annoyed you cannot express your opinion that he is in mental decline, then in my opinion that is regrettable. Its not a discussion that can add to the thread.

'I think he is in mental decline'
'Do you have any evidence?'
'No but i can see it with my eyes sure'
'Ok so....'

The above only varies in the length it takes to get someone to admit there is no medical evidence or basis for the opinion, and thus nothing to actually discuss. But in the meantime the thread has been disrupted and actual discussion has ground to a halt. I dont know if thats always the intent, but thats the effect.

This isnt me making stuff up - this is what has happened.

Finally - can you please stop taking cheap shots at the mod team. We understand our actions and are well able to stand by them. We are, as you can imagine, busy moderating the forum. The little cheap shots you have posted a couple of times in this thread are really unwarranted and frankly just distasteful. My fellow comods are, in my opinion, doing a really good job keeping the Trump v Biden thread rolling, clean and civil for both sides. You insinuating otherwise is just crass.

Ten of Swords · 06-11-2020 05:13PM

Report posts has always been the advice.

The Trump vs Biden thread is incredibly fast moving. Part 4 was set up just before midnight on the 3rd and we will be moving to part 5 later tonight, so in the space of 2 and a half days (66 hours) there has been nearly 10,000 posts. The scale of the thread is such that the mods cannot possibly read every single post so if you don't report a post you have an issue with then there is little chance a mod will see it.

06-11-2020 05:16PM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Lad banned there for saying Biden has dementia. You know that he could have early stage dementia and not be diagnosed? I can't imagine how thin-skinned you have to be to be unable to read people's opinions about your dear leader.

In fairness, he could have all manner of ailments. But weird levels of guesswork is not gonna lead to a productive discussion.

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Comments